Town Council traffic topic

Sun 21 Nov 2021, 17:00 (last edited on Sun 21 Nov 2021, 17:03)

Ok, that’ll do.

If you have an opinion then please email it to the Town Council. Or post it somewhere else, maybe the “Charlbury Tractors Owners’ Club” or the “We Are Screwing Up The Planet For Subsequent Generations But Hey Who Cares I Really Need To Drive 200 Yards To The Co-op” group on Facebook or something. I don’t really care, just not here.

You don’t go into a pub and start loudly and repeatedly badmouthing the landlord’s football team. Similarly you don’t post half-baked prejudices about cyclists here, because cycling for transport, sustainability, and more liveable towns is my ‘team’. Sorry, those of you who are on Team Clarkson, that’s just the way it goes.

Yes, I am taking advantage of my position as the site owner; that’s my prerogative as the person who pays the bills. I don’t mind spending my free time working on the site, I just don’t want to wake up every morning and wonder why I bother. You are free to be equally partial on any site you might run. Please feel free to go onto Facebook and moan about my extreme capriciousness.

Fin.

Sun 21 Nov 2021, 16:46

Highly irresponsible to propose cyclists be allowed to cycle the wrong way along the narrow one-way streets in town.  Those cyclists who already ignore the signs and travel the wrong way are breaking the law and the town council proposes rewarding such behaviour.  If cyclists can use Browns Lane and Market Street in this manner how are you going to stop them doing so on Sheep Street and Fishers Lane?  Unbelievable. 

Sun 21 Nov 2021, 14:54

The only time I can remember a thread being this long is when the trains were being discussed!  I too object to cyclists going along Browns Lane and Market Street the wrong way.  Why should they?  Do they not have to obey the Highway Code ?  It’s like in Oxford when many cyclists go through red lights, don’t wear helmets and ride on the pavements.  These are narrow streets in Charlbury and an accident waiting to happen if it were to be permitted.  Please don’t forget that pedestrians also use these roads and could also be in danger.

Sun 21 Nov 2021, 13:28

A brief word in support of cycle contraflows: the aim of these in combination with other measures (such as lower speed limits), is to shift the atmosphere in the town centre towards one where the streets are primarily for people walking and cycling, although we allow people to bring their cars through slowly and very carefully. I think that journeys on foot and by bike must already be the majority, so all of us stand to benefit from making this shift. 

Sat 20 Nov 2021, 10:06 (last edited on Sat 20 Nov 2021, 10:07)

If like many of us and you have sent a letter or email to object on the cycling part of the town council proposals or any of the other proposals for that matter don't forget that you if you wish you can attend the meeting, but here's the thing if I remember correctly that if you do attend you are not permitted to say anything at the meeting  unless you have contacted the town council clerk in advance to ask to be allowed to have your say.

I hope someone will correct me on this if I have this wrong but I believe this is the case.

But regardless whether you want to have a say at the meeting or if you are unable to attend then Please make sure you have sent in your objections ASAP to one of the links below as from the sounds of it just by liking someone's post or putting your comment here on forum will not help in any decision making by the CTC so get your letters / Emails sent in advance as only then will they have to read out at the meeting and minuted and that way our concerns will have to addressed.

charlburytownclerk@gmail.com

www.charlburytowncouncil.co.uk/contact-us

Fri 19 Nov 2021, 19:11

As both a cyclist and motorist (and of course pedestrian) I think that the road rules have to apply to all road users - it is inviting disaster to permit cyclists to go the wrong way, and those who do deserve the odd telling-off; I think the guiding principle needs to be consideration for others - it is this which has motivated the introduction of the 20mph limits, but there are places like Market Street and Park Street where even this speed is just too much. Where there is the likelihood of children or dogs - or basically anyone - who might inadvertently step off the pavement, it is just common courtesy to err on the side of caution.

Fri 19 Nov 2021, 15:46

Tim, as I exited your shop some minutes ago I took the liberty of shouting rather loudly and rudely at a lycra clad cyclist bursting  the wrong way up Market Street just in front of me. My pleasantries were endorsed by a gentleman with walking stick. I write this in support of your earlier posts on this thread.

Fri 19 Nov 2021, 12:24 (last edited on Fri 19 Nov 2021, 13:15)

tried to send via the link we were given but kept being returned undeliverable i have since been onto the town council website and hopefully sent it via their contact page 

https://www.charlburytowncouncil.co.uk/contact-us/

hopefully this will work 

I have also went to put a hard copy in the cornerhouse but where do we put your post  ?

Come on town council get your act together if your offering the Corner house as a delivery address then get a secure drop box for confidential letters there please !

Have just retried this link charlburytownclerk@gmail.com fingers crossed no rebound as yet 

Thu 18 Nov 2021, 15:34 (last edited on Thu 18 Nov 2021, 15:35)

Alice makes various points about the reduction of speed on The Slade and adjacent roads, and stresses the environmental advantages of lowering car speeds.

Whilst I in no way dissent from her statement that the most dangerous places in town are Banbury Hill, Sturt Road, The Slade, Woodstock Road and…

Long post - click to read full text

Thu 18 Nov 2021, 12:17

Tim is correct, when I was on the council there were were a lot of people who didn't look online for things. There were also a lot of people who felt that their views were completely ignored by the council because the council has an agenda which is to push through changes for environmental reasons without taking into account the views of residents. Consequently they didn't bother attending council meetings or commenting because it was a waste of their time since the result was from their POV a forgone conclusion and a win for the council. How you deal with that attitude I don't know, but I doubt it's changed.

Thu 18 Nov 2021, 11:51

As a supporter of Speedwatch I have observed that traffic slows for the duration of the monitoring session and accelerates with glee the minute you start to pack up. I’m sorry to say that law breakers don’t learn from being asked politely.

There is now years of evidence showing that…

Long post - click to read full text

Thu 18 Nov 2021, 11:22 (last edited on Thu 18 Nov 2021, 13:45)

Thanks for the link James, it would have been a great help to put a link on the original traffic proposal post in the "latest news" section in the first place, but as always better late than never I suppose, also it may be worth adding on the original post…

Long post - click to read full text

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 23:56 (last edited on Thu 18 Nov 2021, 00:00)

It makes virtually no difference from the station. Where it does make a difference for somebody who comes via Thames Street from that end of town or, of course, from the Spelsbury direction in general (after they'd managed a fairly stiff climb up Pound Hill).

The difference in that case is it's 280 metres further and another 7 metres of ascent (as the cyclist has to drop down 7 metres to Church Lane). Whether that is a hardship or not to an ordinary cyclist is a matter of debate.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 23:27

This is just my personal opinion but if you start from the station and end at the Bull you have climbed the same amount whichever way you go?

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 22:27

The case Richard Fairhurst makes for contraflow for cycling in Market St actually makes perfect sense, and it is interesting to see both he and Steve Jones talking about safer pavements. Pedestrians do tend to get forgotten when councils propose improvements to layouts in schemes like this, but in the end, nearly all of us are pedestrians. 

Tim Widdows – re walking along the one way street with a bike, it's worth bearing in mind that the width of a bike and its pusher are more than twice the width of a ridden bike and they'd get in the way of oncoming pedestrians and cars even more than if the person were simply riding the bike.  

Tim, and anyone else wishing to share their views with the council, can email the new town clerk, Lisa Wilkinson, on charlburytownclerk [@] gmail.com. The council has a new postal address too I (handy for you, Tim!): 

Charlbury Town Council
c/o Charlbury Corner HouseMarket StreetCharlbury, OX7 3QW

And Jim Holah is right – speeding cars are a constant threat to us all. I think the contraflows would be are a minor improvement, but it's the big battles on the Slade and elsewhere that we need to make sure we win.  

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 21:48 (last edited on Wed 17 Nov 2021, 21:55)

Having cycled via the Churchyard, then I can't say I found it a hardship either and I'm far from a superfit lycra-clad rider with a carbon fibre bike.

As it is, to get some numbers into this, I put the two routes from the end of Thames Street to the…

Long post - click to read full text

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 21:11

I was disagreeing that it was “no hardship”. An extra climb is not significant if you’re a speedy guy on a carbon-fibre bike; it is if you’re pulling a five-year old along on a tandem.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 21:06 (last edited on Wed 17 Nov 2021, 21:10)

Richard,
   are you denying that you wrote :-

"Third, maybe a detour via the churchyard is “no hardship” if you’re lucky enough to be a super-fit Lycra-clad whippet riding for pleasure on a carbon-fibre bike."

I wrote :-

"pure hyperbole to claim that cycling via the Churchyard requires somebody to be a lycra-clad superfit cyclist on a carbon fibre bike."

I stand by this. You were exaggerating for effect.

I should add that on Sunday I was passed by a man and what I assume where his two young sons, all on bikes through the churchyard (like me, they had just come from the station). None wore lycra, and none were on carbon racing bikes.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 21:03

If you could refrain from putting words in my mouth, Steve, that would be smashing. I didn’t say “requires”. I said “we would very much like not to add another climb to the ride”. Thank you very much.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 20:47

Richard, pure hyperbole to claim that cycling via the Churchyard requires somebody to be a lycra-clad superfit cyclist on a carbon fibre bike. Yes, there's a moderate climb up Church Street and a slight rise along Church Lane but it's hardly a major test. Frankly, if somebody is put off…

Long post - click to read full text

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 18:52 (last edited on Wed 17 Nov 2021, 18:53)

Sadly Richard people with dementia don't, because they think the traffic can see them and will be aware they're likely to step out. As I said, charlbury used to claim to be dementia friendly, and with Rushy bank going ahead, it's going to need to be more aware not less. 

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 17:54 (last edited on Wed 17 Nov 2021, 17:59)

As a resident of Market Street, I would like to see two-way cycling permitted for three reasons.

First, it will help slow the car traffic on the street. There has been a long-standing issue with dangerous speeds on this street and the Town Council has several years of correspondence, particularly…

Long post - click to read full text

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 17:51

My understanding is that speed cameras as with other forms of enforcement come under the jurisdiction of Thames Valley Police.  I would welcome any ideas as to how we may be able to facilitate the operation of speed enforcement cameras in the town to surmount that particular institutional obstacle!

Especially examples from elsewhere.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 17:15

I agree with what Sam has put - doing a quick google search has immediately come up with 2 devices/suppliers (Truvelo & Jenoptik) which appear to be mountable on existing lighting columns. For the 'main' roads, where speeding is worst, cameras offer a better solution than putting up 20mph signs.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 17:11

To be fair Gareth at the start of the thread you did put.. 

"Following on from the news item, a topic for discussion. Thoughts please!"

So we are all presuming this is where you you wanted us to put our comments.

Is there a link that you can put on here for us to direct our " thoughts " directly to the council without us all having to google how to do it please just incase we are unable to attend the meeting in person, as it's obvious there are a lot members of the community that would like their views to be taken into consideration that is if it's not too late.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 16:53 (last edited on Wed 17 Nov 2021, 17:48)

For clarity (and I would guide those who didn’t make it that far to the final paragraph of the news item) - people wanting to make specific representations to the Town Council should do so directly.  Plenty of town councillors will be following this, but as with anything on the forum, we won't assume that anything said here is necessarily representative of broader public opinion.

To pick up on a point Rosemary made, the issue around Grammar School Hill is specifically one of our proposals.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 16:18

Regarding the idea to have cycle access via a contra-flow arrangement along Market Street and Browns Lane, I must say, as one of the many keen cyclists in Charlbury, this is non-sensical. We should not be encouraging 'my kind' to cycle against the traffic for starters and I just can't see how this works practically, especially up Browns Lane, when I may want to cycle up to CoOp and have to take evasive action on to the pavement when a car or bus even comes down the other way.

As SJ comments, we can cycle (slowly and respectfully) through the churchyard, which I do on almost a daily basis. It's really no hardship. 

PS Yes, I have been to Holland. Cracking place.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 14:54

Is there an email where i can my concerns about these traffic calming measures, or do we raise them on here.

Any help greatly appreciated.

Wed 17 Nov 2021, 11:54

 I am against a proposed 20 mph speed limit on The Slade -- although I suspect I'm in a minority on this. The dip on the road is steep, and think 20 mph would be potentially dangerous in snow and also when icy. Not everyone drives huge Chelsea tractors or other 4-wheeled drive cars. What we don't need is people diverting through the town to avoid a potentially dangerous road.

I am open to the possibility of building some kind of speed gate to try and slow traffic down, although it's not obvious where such gates could be sited. This would be easier on the Banbury Rd/Woodstock Road than on The Slade. I'm less keen on trying to build out into the roadway in The Slade/Sturt Road itself, except perhaps near Londis somewhere. Although I would like the Enstone Rd crossroads made safer, I don't see building out into The Slade near the crossroads as a practicable way of doing this. 

Simon's suggestion of calming measures for the Ditchley Rd is also impractical. It's already 20 mph, and parked cars make it single-lane traffic in practice in quite a few places at the lower end of the road. This is a road much used by tractors and large agricultural vehicles. They need to have good access. 

I like many of the other suggestions about parking -- but certainly not reducing the car parking near the Co-op, and I am also against bikes going against the 1-way system. I was almost knocked over by somebody doing just that by The Bull only a few weeks ago.

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 22:58

The Banbury Hill/The Slade problem could easily be solved by fitting modern digital speed cameras - far cheaper & quicker than doing a load of physical road layout changes. 

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 21:45

CYCLISTS’ ACCESS

Market Street and Browns Lane. Contraflow for cyclists. Just, no. Mad idea. Hard enough to hear a cyclist speeding past you in Brown's Lane just where the pavement runs out and you are forced to step into the road. To be able to hear traffic is a safety valve, but speeding cyclists can barely he heard, let alone avoided, in such  circumstances as these. Some people can’t hear. I was nearly knocked down by one, and I'm careful, and I can hear.

Market Street is now so busy  with traffic of every kind, it makes it almost impossible for all pedestrians - parents with children, the elderly and the infirm, to name just a few - to be able to get from one end to the other, safely and with confidence. Just trying to imagine a group of cyclists powering their way upstream of all this beggars belief. 

PARKING

The very dangerous place that needs addressing right now, because of the the lack of double yellow lines,  is Grammar School Hill. It’s a totally blind bend. 😳

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 20:47

Again - ever been to Holland? Trust me, the roads along the grachts (grachten??) are VERY NARROW. Barely enough to get past. Yet all the time - note that, ALL the time - a bustle of cyclists and pedestrians and motor vehicles pass by with nary a conflict. It's OUR assumptions and priorities that are illogical, wrong, and part of a collective species suicide pact of convenience (for some) over all consideration.

Harriet's point has more weight but again the issue is one of perception. Getting used to it. Being considerate and sensible .

Yes, it was quite freaky at first driving into a town and immediately coming across a woonerf (huh?! Where's da road gone?! And there's kids and bikes and scooters coming in from all sides!) Or into a large area of town with narrow canal-side roads, parked vehicles all along one side, a cold gray gracht on t'other (guard rails - ha! - guards are for wimps) and hordes of bikes coming towards you (often in morning or evening with a couple of kids balanced on the back rack).

One does hear a lot of bicycle bells tinkling away. Again a change of perception. It is "polite" to give a short ting in warning. And not assume the pedestrian in front of you isn't deaf. Had that. Here bell-ringing, it's seen as rude. In France on fast roads its polite and sensible to toot the horn a good way from the cyclist(s) one is coming up on fast, to let them know you're there. Here...

These... all non-issues with the right outlook.

It's our  way of thinking that isn't right and in this tiny little trivial example of a sensible, convenient, sustainable, low-resource use way of town living, mixing vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists and all, some "attitudinal adjustment" is in order, toot de sweet, along with a lot of other attitudinal adjustments for a longer term survival on our little starship and its straining life support system. That is what is in order.

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 20:45

Sweating the small stuff again.....I can't think of the last time I was intimidated by a cyclist (although I accept Harriets point that cyclists are quiet & need to be careful of others) as opposed to HGV's careering through town, constant delivery vehicles, speeding noisy vehicles & motorcycles.  Let's focus on the big wins & the potential for an improved environment.

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 20:14

And again, I'll make the point about dementia. Charlbury is after all supposedly dementia friendly.... While they won't be driving, they will be walking and they won't expect cyclists to be coming the wrong way towards them. 

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 20:11

The point about the Netherlands is not exactly relevant to whether a one way street is wide enough for a cyclist and a motor vehicle travelling in the opposite direction to pass one another. There is precisely zero possibility of that on Brown's Lane or Market Street unless all the parked cars are removed.

The Netherlands has done a lot of engineering work to make cycle lanes, but even they won't have found a way to allow a cycle to pass an S3 bus travelling in the opposite direction on Brown's Lane.

The UK government guidance document on contra-flow cycling on one way systems is clearly written in the context of there being space for a cycle lane (which can be used for bi-directional traffic). See section 6.4.

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 20:01

Have people ever been to the Netherlands? 

There it is the very general rule that "FIETSERS <excepted>" signs were everywhere on almost every one-way street unless obviously suicidal to be anything but manifestly having to be one-way. 

The "problem" of meeting fiets coming the "wrong way" simply DOES NOT EXIST…

Long post - click to read full text

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 19:52

I would echo Tim's point on this. Market Street and is far to narrow to allow safe cycling in the opposite direction to vehicles. In the case of Market Street, there is also an alternative route through the Churchyard.

Where cyclists are permitted to travel against one-way traffic flow, I've only seen it done where there is room for a cycle and a vehicle to pass safely and usually with a marked lane. There is absolutely no possibility of that on Browns Lane, Market Street, Fishers Lane or Browns Lane as far as I can see, and it's inviting an accident.

This feels like a gesture, full of potential safety issues which would, in practice, make very little difference to the practicality of cycling round town.

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 18:23

If I have read this correctly that you are proposing to allowing cyclist to have free rein cycling either way up a one way street is one of the stupidest ideas I have heard, who gets right of way ? what happens if an accident happens and then you will have the ones that say oh I thought this applied to all the one way streets, some cyclist think they are a law unto themselves at the best of times, whilst I applaud they want to be more environmentally friendly they already have 2 options to choose from get off their bike and walk down the one way street or take the longer route round like every other person either in a car or on a horse.

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 17:24

I think the outlined initiatives are needed and it is also good not to lose sight of the environmental impact of cars. If traffic calming measures are being thought about for The Slade, can Ditchley Road also be included for consideration, speeds are often 40MPH+ up and down the road. This will also be controversial, but what about reducing the number of spaces behind the Co-op, to discourage casual car use and encourage walking or cycling.

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 13:25

It's heartening to hear that the new TC is taking a proactive approach to these issues, many of which are very sensible, subject to details being worked through with residents.  I particularly welcome the acknowledgement that traffic calming is required at key points, along with reduced limits on Spelsbury Rd and a wider 20mph across the town.  Keep up the momentum please.

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 12:40

Brilliant, keep up the good work!

Tue 16 Nov 2021, 12:04

Following on from the news item, a topic for discussion.  Thoughts please!